David A
Senior Member
It does, as if the city was reluctantly forced to do something but really was not that interested so did it, does it, in a half as*ed way.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
Glenco
Senior Member
Financed by committee. Never a good plan
EdwardEdm
Active Member
I find these responses strange all because the fare vending machine is down. Yes, I agree there should be two. And ETS should have more FVM's located at Transit Centres, but apparently Mill Woods and WEM are the only ones worthy of receiving them. And Mill Woods has them nearby anyways at the LRT stop. This will be a moot point in this case as in a month open payment rolls out. That fact kind of made me roll my eyes at the original post making a big deal out of this FVM being down.
The EIA is outside of City Limits. There's no reason ETS should pay for the service entirely, and indeed, with any regional services they have operated it is a full cost recovery model. The fact that Edmonton is helping pay for the 747 makes it different than other regional services ETS operates or has operated. Of course, if Edmonton annexed the EIA and it's lands, and recieved the tax revenue, then things would be different.
The fact the EIA is outside of City Limits does mean ETS has to operate buses which are so equipped. They do need to carry a kit for roadside emergencies, as well has having CVIP stickers. The 747 additionally had modified interiors with luggage racks. While these aren't huge requirements or costs in the grand scheme of things, they do mean ETS has to maintain a specific pool of buses.
The EIA is outside of City Limits. There's no reason ETS should pay for the service entirely, and indeed, with any regional services they have operated it is a full cost recovery model. The fact that Edmonton is helping pay for the 747 makes it different than other regional services ETS operates or has operated. Of course, if Edmonton annexed the EIA and it's lands, and recieved the tax revenue, then things would be different.
The fact the EIA is outside of City Limits does mean ETS has to operate buses which are so equipped. They do need to carry a kit for roadside emergencies, as well has having CVIP stickers. The 747 additionally had modified interiors with luggage racks. While these aren't huge requirements or costs in the grand scheme of things, they do mean ETS has to maintain a specific pool of buses.
Glenco
Senior Member
I agree 100% the city should have annexed the airport which of course is the problem. That is why we are stuck with a committee deciding the quality of transit service to the airport.
David A
Senior Member
The ongoing cost sharing and location arguments are frankly ridiculous in this situation. It is called the Edmonton International Airport not the Leduc Airport for a reason. I suspect more of the people who use it are from Edmonton and so it is important for people in Edmonton to have a good transportation service to and from this airport. What does Leduc care about that? If you live in Leduc you could probably even walk to the airport if needed.
The fare vending machines problem is frustrating and typical of a city that seems to have problems maintaining almost anything, but hopefully the new payment system will allow people to have a better alternative.
The fare vending machines problem is frustrating and typical of a city that seems to have problems maintaining almost anything, but hopefully the new payment system will allow people to have a better alternative.
thommyjo
Senior Member
I agree, not a concern once tap to pay comes online. But we’ve had years without it where we need ARC machines to work.
And the frustration is mostly pointing to the vending machine being down as indicative of a larger cultural problem.
Whether it’s the horrible signage in YEG to find the machine, the fact that it’s broken, the fact that there’s only 1, giving no backup for service issues, the fact that the employee at the desk for transportation didn’t even know the machine was down, didn’t have any alternative solutions for what I could do, or how poorly the bus area is marked…. Everything is just amateur hour. It’s so tough to go to other cities that aren’t even way bigger, and to have a consistently better experience all the time.
Also, on another note, Winnipeg outshining our arrivals/departure loop as much as they do is such an embarrassment too.
So few things we can have civic pride in it feels…
David A
Senior Member
In so many ways Edmonton is such a visitor unfriendly city, which is odd for a place not over run with tourists. However, I feel it is more indifference and tourism being an after thought, or more likely not thought of at all.
The_Cat
Senior Member
There seems to be little, if any, cooperation with bureaucratic structures in our city. We’ve had to fight for LRT getting built. Our city does no promotion. A lot of planning is done in silos.
Glenco
Senior Member
Leduc has more at stake than you think. A lot of people take the shuttle bus from Leduc to the airport and transfer to the 747 with a single payment and transfer
The_Cat
Senior Member
I don’t know if this is the right thread, but I think the southbound bus lane at 101 Street (Kingsway to 107 Avenue) is done.
Last edited:
Gronk!
Senior Member
The Central LRT signs are in dire need of updating.
Scotia Place needs to be replaced by Rice Howard Place.
Royal Bank needs to be replaced by Edmonton Unlimited.
Scotia Place needs to be replaced by Rice Howard Place.
Royal Bank needs to be replaced by Edmonton Unlimited.
YEG Bus Rider
Active Member
Winter Service Changes
I don’t understand why there needs to be additional service on route 4 on Boxing Day!
| December 26 (Boxing Day) | Buses and LRT will operate using Saturday schedules. There will also be additional service on Route 4. |
yeggator
Active Member
Because it goes to WEM
The_Cat
Senior Member
West Edmonton Mall Boxing Day Shopping?
YEG Bus Rider
Active Member
Long ago, 2015 or so, I suggested that WEM & Southgate should be paying for extra service on route 4 for Boxing Day (8am-1pm) and Saturday/Sunday midday (1pm-7pm) (7.5 min frequency). I also was annoyed that ETS was adding service to route 4 while route 2 was annoyingly overloaded and unreliable weekday early evenings and Sunday midday with no willingness to increase from 30 minutes.
In the old network, those extra 4 trips used to run to South Campus instead of University, so it was blatantly obvious that intent was to facilitate access via LRT at South Campus. With the redesign, those trips were extended to University on Saturday and extra Sunday midday service was eliminated.
Too bad WEM & Southgate are probably unwilling to openly sponsor transit service.
In the old network, those extra 4 trips used to run to South Campus instead of University, so it was blatantly obvious that intent was to facilitate access via LRT at South Campus. With the redesign, those trips were extended to University on Saturday and extra Sunday midday service was eliminated.
Too bad WEM & Southgate are probably unwilling to openly sponsor transit service.
Last edited: